62 replies to this topic

[keithisco]

jules99, on 25 February 2012 - 08:43 PM, said:

Hi keithisco
Just to suggest that there were some great minds existing around (prior to) the time of the construction of Dendera, Archimedes being the first to spring to mind. This was a time of science and tech advancement, with death rays, lens polishing and astronomical discoveries. We have the Antikythera mechanism dating roughly from this period, the Colossus of Rhodes and legends of automata..
Perhaps the mythological explanation could mask a scientific experiment, explained in terms the masses might understand..

"Death Rays"? a phalanx of polished shield to blind an enemy, not exactly "Death Rays". the Colossus of Rhodes was a stone statue, Archimedes was long dead when the Antikythera machanism was devised ( about 200 years) . I do not doubt for one second that the builder of the mechanism was less than a genius,Archimedes was certainly not associated with Dendera in Egypt, that centre was way before his time.

Whilst I am sure that many scientifics advancements were lost to mankind when the Library at Alexandria was sacked and burned, most of the manuscipts had already been copied by  the Moors and are in Spain

[Harte]

keithisco, on 25 February 2012 - 08:44 PM, said:

Sorry... utter rubbish!! When at Uni we recreated the Baghdad Battery, I think most Uni's do. Using exactly the same materials, and varying the dielectric medium to what might have been available then, and even using modern dielectirc mediums we managed less than 1 volt DC.

So just give up, there were no light bulbs in Baghdad, because oil soaked torches supplied the NEED.

Keith,

Also, nobody has stated that the so-called "Baghdad battery" dates to the common era.

In addition, the Horus myth in the depiction FAR predates the freize in question, as I stated earlier.

Here's an earlier (non-Grecian) interpretation:



That's the pic that I mentioned from the site I linked.

I told everyone this earlier.

Apparently, I am to be either ignored or dibelieved.

Good luck, Keith.

Harte

[kmt_sesh]

Harte, on 26 February 2012 - 06:03 AM, said:

...

Apparently, I am to be either ignored or dibelieved.

Good luck, Keith.

Harte

You know how it is, Harte. Even with evidence staring them full in the face, and no matter how cogent and rational the explanation, fans of the fringe cling mightily to fantasy.

Yes, ignoring and disbelieving are much easier to do.

[questionmark]

kmt_sesh, on 26 February 2012 - 11:25 PM, said:

You know how it is, Harte. Even with evidence staring them full in the face, and no matter how cogent and rational the explanation, fans of the fringe cling mightily to fantasy.

Yes, ignoring and disbelieving are much easier to do.

Come on, give 'em a little credit, they just are wearing the wrong glasses and tell us what they see!

[SamDavies]

Harte, on 24 February 2012 - 03:45 PM, said:

The hieroglyphs on the walls beside these carvings say that what people see as a glass bulb is the AE (Ptolemaic) way of representing the "perfection" of Harsomptus.

Kind of like a halo.

The snake is coming out of a lotus bloom.

The lotus is extremely white.  In the morning sun, it has this "glow" if you will.

The "perfection" of Harsomptus, who emerges from the lotus blossom in the myth this is a representation of.
See here:


That same website has a pic of the earlier, true Egyptian representation of the same thing.  The one this thread is talking about is actually a Greek interpretation.

Harte

Thanks so much for this link , Harte. It is the info I've been looking for   but could not find less I spend half my life wading through rubbish to get to the gold. Man, I so love UM site.

I just can not understand why anyone sees these as light bulbs . It is even more sad when some refuse to accept they are anything but, even when the Egyptian text next to the images states clearly what it all means!! This is why the North Korean Government doesn't permit the taking and publishing of incomplete photos of signs/writings or photos. It is so easy to mislead people by only showing part of a picture or script. Many are too lazy to do their own research or even question where the rest of the picture is!! Just believe everything they are told without question.

It is a really good feeling to now know what the entire picture means. Like, I did not accept that there were beings walking around that were literally half man and half beast. I could only see these images as depictions of gods being explained by their attributes by drawing them as human with beast head. Or that perhaps sometimes the priests wore animal head dresses like the American Indians did and still do. It is nice to know I have been on the right track.

When I look at the two small 'light bulbs' sitting side by side I see a snake climbing up a bush that is growing in a coiled terracotta pot, if I try not to think about the Egyptian side of things, lol.

Again, light bulbs are difficult to make and need a power source. There are no ancient light bulbs lying around either in Egypt or Baghdad. And I am sure at least one would have survived in all the hundreds of dig sites around the ME.

[kmt_sesh]

SamDavies, on 28 February 2012 - 05:57 PM, said:

Thanks so much for this link , Harte. It is the info I've been looking for   but could not find less I spend half my life wading through rubbish to get to the gold. Man, I so love UM site.

I just can not understand why anyone sees these as light bulbs . It is even more sad when some refuse to accept they are anything but, even when the Egyptian text next to the images states clearly what it all means!! This is why the North Korean Government doesn't permit the taking and publishing of incomplete photos of signs/writings or photos. It is so easy to mislead people by only showing part of a picture or script. Many are too lazy to do their own research or even question where the rest of the picture is!! Just believe everything they are told without question.

It is a really good feeling to now know what the entire picture means. Like, I did not accept that there were beings walking around that were literally half man and half beast. I could only see these images as depictions of gods being explained by their attributes by drawing them as human with beast head. Or that perhaps sometimes the priests wore animal head dresses like the American Indians did and still do. It is nice to know I have been on the right track.

When I look at the two small 'light bulbs' sitting side by side I see a snake climbing up a bush that is growing in a coiled terracotta pot, if I try not to think about the Egyptian side of things, lol.

Again, light bulbs are difficult to make and need a power source. There are no ancient light bulbs lying around either in Egypt or Baghdad. And I am sure at least one would have survived in all the hundreds of dig sites around the ME.

One thing that's important to remember regarding this kind of thing in Egypt, is that when you see a depiction accompanying hieroglyphs, the two absolutely must be understood as a unit. One cannot be divorced from the other. In a way, I suppose, it's something like an article in a newspaper that includes an inset photograph: the photo by itself might not make all that much sense to you, but the article accompanying it explains it all. As Harte has correctly pointed out, the hieroglyphic inscription next to the serpent-and-flower depiction explains what the image itself means.

That said, many in the fringe camp happily argue for the "lightbulb" scenario and never even show or mention the accompanying inscription. Chances are they have no idea what it says to begin with, but they probably wouldn't care, anyway. They see a "lightbulb," so therefore it must be a lightbulb--all other possible explanations be damned. It's foolish, yes, but so it goes. Yet I remember one or two fringe adherents who were perfectly aware of the inscription and its translations, but were able to dismiss it simply by stating that Egyptologists mistranslated it and don't understand what it says. Needless to say, this kind of argument is only more absurd.

Arguments about the Baghdad "battery" are tedious. People express chronic astonishment over something that couldn't even generate enough electricity to power a small flashlight. In all honesty we don't know what the jar and its solution were meant to be or do. There are numerous possible explanations, but again fringe adherents are quick to jump to the flashiest explanation--even if it's the least likely.

Think of it this way: with either the Baghdad "battery" or the Dendera "lightbulb," what other evidence can one present to demonstrate the use of electricity in these ancient societies? Where is evidence for the infrastructure to provide electrical capabilities to ancient temples or villages? When one looks at such things logically, one immediately realizes no such evidence exists. At all. It seems odd, then, to regard ambiguous things like the Baghdad "battery" or the Dendera "lightbulb" as "proof" for electrical usage way back then. We have no real-world proof that such a thing existed, but we have countless examples of small oil lamps that people carried and used to light their way.

[kmt_sesh]

tomgat, on 29 February 2012 - 09:06 AM, said:

well I doubt the Egyptians used eggplants much nor were they part of their mythology. Maybe they were but it doesn't seem likely.
it is certainly far more plausible than this one, hysterical "professor" I seen on tv who insisted that it was obvious, once you covered up the captions in the book of the afore mentioned, that it was eggplants. Yet there he was telling everyone what the images really were depicting.


---------------------



new york private investigator

I'm not aware of eggplants figuring much at all into ancient Egyptian culture. While it was introduced into the Middle East through India and Asia, I believe this was more in medieval times, not ancient times. I could be wrong about that, but I can state with some confidence that eggplants are not part of ancient Egyptian mythology. I have no idea where that came from.

Whose post are you replying to, tomgat? It would help to use the quote feature in your tool set. It sounds vaguely familiar but I can't remember where this was first mentioned in our discussion.

[Harte]

SamDavies, on 28 February 2012 - 05:57 PM, said:

Thanks so much for this link , Harte. It is the info I've been looking for   but could not find less I spend half my life wading through rubbish to get to the gold. Man, I so love UM site.

You're quite welcome Mr. Davies.

If Sam is your real name, that's my boy's name too.

Anyway, glad to provide what I have for the edification of others.

That's my raison d'etre at U-M, though I'm sure there are many here that think I'm here just to argue!

Harte

[Abramelin]

tomgat, on 29 February 2012 - 09:06 AM, said:

well I doubt the Egyptians used eggplants much nor were they part of their mythology. Maybe they were but it doesn't seem likely.
it is certainly far more plausible than this one, hysterical "professor" I seen on tv who insisted that it was obvious, once you covered up the captions in the book of the afore mentioned, that it was eggplants. Yet there he was telling everyone what the images really were depicting.


---------------------



new york private investigator

Eggplants?? LOL.

These Egyptian images depict something HUGE compared to eggplants.

The plant is native to the Indian subcontinent.[1][2] It has been cultivated in southern and eastern Asia since prehistory, but appears to have become known to the Western world no earlier than ca. 1500.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eggplant

[Myles]

Abramelin, on 29 February 2012 - 08:57 PM, said:

Eggplants?? LOL.

These Egyptian images depict something HUGE compared to eggplants.

The plant is native to the Indian subcontinent.[1][2] It has been cultivated in southern and eastern Asia since prehistory, but appears to have become known to the Western world no earlier than ca. 1500.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eggplant

You may laugh at eggplants, but it is much more likely than light bulbs.

[kmt_sesh]

Myles, on 01 March 2012 - 12:28 PM, said:

You may laugh at eggplants, but it is much more likely than light bulbs.

Why don't we just compromise: they're glow-in-the-dark eggplants.

[Myles]

kmt_sesh, on 01 March 2012 - 04:02 PM, said:

Why don't we just compromise: they're glow-in-the-dark eggplants.

I like it!!   Bioluminescent plants are not unheard of.   Several mushrooms glow.

[SamDavies]

Harte, on 29 February 2012 - 06:04 PM, said:

You're quite welcome Mr. Davies.

If Sam is your real name, that's my boy's name too.

Anyway, glad to provide what I have for the edification of others.

That's my raison d'etre at U-M, though I'm sure there are many here that think I'm here just to argue!

Harte

Sam's my real name. I'm one of the few here going by my real name and I really do live just outside of Darwin. And my ugly mug can be seen at www.sam-davies.blogspot.com that is linked to two other of my sites.

Yeah, all my life people have accused or suggested I just like to argue. Many can't seem to distinguish between debate and arguing. It is very frustrating. Or they misinterpret sharing ideas with trying to tell people what to believe. I, like you, have some very strong beliefs like most of us here. At the end of the day I just like to share and learn. So if some here like to think you or I or any of us are here just to argue then it is their problem. I've found that most of my life few people are very rarely satisfied unless one agrees with them and only them and can't handle people who say 'no'. So when I take the time to look at the whole picture and don't see light bulbs, I will say so.
cheers,
Sam

[SamDavies]

kmt_sesh, on 28 February 2012 - 07:31 PM, said:

One thing that's important to remember regarding this kind of thing in Egypt, is that when you see a depiction accompanying hieroglyphs, the two absolutely must be understood as a unit. One cannot be divorced from the other. In a way, I suppose, it's something like an article in a newspaper that includes an inset photograph: the photo by itself might not make all that much sense to you, but the article accompanying it explains it all. As Harte has correctly pointed out, the hieroglyphic inscription next to the serpent-and-flower depiction explains what the image itself means.

Think of it this way: with either the Baghdad "battery" or the Dendera "lightbulb," what other evidence can one present to demonstrate the use of electricity in these ancient societies? Where is evidence for the infrastructure to provide electrical capabilities to ancient temples or villages? When one looks at such things logically, one immediately realizes no such evidence exists. At all. It seems odd, then, to regard ambiguous things like the Baghdad "battery" or the Dendera "lightbulb" as "proof" for electrical usage way back then. We have no real-world proof that such a thing existed, but we have countless examples of small oil lamps that people carried and used to light their way.

Exactly   . I know it is a little off topic but one of the most desturbing experiences I had regarding people not wanting to accept something was some time back four elderly tourists were here and I was sitting around a table with them when the subject of Cycone Tracy came up. I said I was a survivor of this cyclone of 1974. One of them said the cyclone hit in 1975 and he would not accept otherwise and his three buddies agreed with him!!! I just dropped the subject as they started to get quite hostile. People's pride and arrogance never ceases to amaze me.

[kmt_sesh]

SamDavies, on 04 March 2012 - 02:30 AM, said:

Exactly   . I know it is a little off topic but one of the most desturbing experiences I had regarding people not wanting to accept something was some time back four elderly tourists were here and I was sitting around a table with them when the subject of Cycone Tracy came up. I said I was a survivor of this cyclone of 1974. One of them said the cyclone hit in 1975 and he would not accept otherwise and his three buddies agreed with him!!! I just dropped the subject as they started to get quite hostile. People's pride and arrogance never ceases to amaze me.

Hey, respect your elders! They remember these things better than you do, of course! It doesn't matter if you were right in the middle of it.

And don't argue with them too much. You'll just confuse them.